Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-vl2kb Total loading time: 0.32 Render date: 2021-12-01T09:54:41.040Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

“Spinning a Yarn”: Institutions, Law, and Standards c.1880–1914

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2017

DAVID M. HIGGINS
Affiliation:
David M. Higgins specializes in business and economic history with particular reference to the evolution and protection of trademarks, merchandise marks and unfair competition.. Newcastle University Business School, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 4SE. E-mail: david.higgins@ncl.ac.uk
AASHISH VELKAR
Affiliation:
Aashish Velkar is an economic and business historian with interests in standards and standardization, economic institutions, and industrial processes.This author would like to acknowledge The Pasold Fund, which provided financial assistance to conduct part of the archival research for this project. School of Arts, Languages and Cultures University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL. E-mail: aashish.velkar@manchester.ac.uk

Abstract

The Manchester Chamber of Commerce established the Manchester Testing House in 1895, and introduced uniform yarn contracting rules in 1897. The chamber made these institutional “innovations” to deal with the nefarious practice of “short-reeling.” This case study explains how and why merchants were crucial to undoing weaknesses in domestic —and to some extent foreign—legislation to overcome this fraudulent activity. We argue that the Testing House and uniform contract were tantamount to developing a quasi-legal system such that private standards established through cooperative agreements had legal sanction. Our study shows how institutions evolved to improve governance along the supply chain for this highly specialized export-orientated industry. This article contributes to the growing literature on historical markets, institutions, and standards. Based on extensive archival sources, we show how specific and complementary commercial institutions developed within grounded notions of governance rather than abstracted spaces of market exchange.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author 2017. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Business History Conference. All rights reserved. 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beckert, Sven. Empire of Cotton: A Global History. New York: Vintage, 2015.Google Scholar
Bowbrick, Peter. The Economics of Quality: Grades and Brands. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
Chapman, Stanley. Merchant Enterprise in Britain: From the Industrial Revolution to World War I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clay, Henry. Confidential Report on the Position of the English Cotton Industry. London: Securities Management Trust, 1931.Google Scholar
Ellison, Thomas. The Cotton Trade of Great Britain: Including a History of the Liverpool Cotton Market and of the Liverpool Cotton Brokers’ Association. London: E. Wilson, 1886.Google Scholar
Farnie, Douglas. English Cotton Industry and the World Market, 1815–1896. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Garside, Alston. Cotton Goes to Market: A Graphic Description of a Great Industry. New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company, 1935.Google Scholar
Helm, Elijah. Chapters in the History of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce. London: Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent & Co, 1902.Google Scholar
Huberman, Michael. Escape from the Market: Negotiating Work in Lancashire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
International Cotton Congress. Report of the Second International Congress of Master Cotton Spinners’ and Manufacturers’ Associations. Manchester, UK: 1905.
Johnson, Paul. Making the Market: Victorian Origins of Corporate Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladas, Stephen. Patents, Trademarks and Related Rights. Vol. III. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Levi, Leone. Chambers and Tribunals of Commerce and the Proposed General Chamber of Commerce in Liverpool. London: Simpkin, Marshall and Company, 1849.Google Scholar
Manchester Chamber of Commerce (MCC) Handbook . Manchester, UK, 1932.
McIvor, Arthur. Organised Capital: Employers’ Associations and Industrial Relations in Northern England, 1880–1939. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Brian. Abstract of British Historical Statistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Murphy, Craig, and Yates, JoAnne. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO): Global Governance Through Voluntary Consensus. New York: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar
Notes on Sampling and Testing: The Handbook of the Testing House and Laboratory . 2nd ed. Manchester, UK, 1913.
PEP Industries Group. Report on the British Cotton Industry. London: Political and Economic Planning, 1934.
Redford, Arthur. Manchester Merchants and Foreign Trade. Vol. II: 1850–1939. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1956.Google Scholar
Report of the Committee of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce . Calcutta, 1889.
Report of the Committee of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce for the year 1903, vol 2 . Calcutta, 1904.
Robson, Ronald. The Cotton Industry in Britain. London: Macmillan, 1957.Google Scholar
Rose, Mary. Firms, Networks and Business Values: The British and American Cotton Industries since 1750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawbridge, Maureen, ed. The Story of Shirley: A History of the Shirley Institute, Manchester, 1919–1988. Manchester, UK: Shirley Institute, 1988.Google Scholar
Scranton, Philip, and Fridenson, Patrick. Reimagining Business History. Baltimore, MD: JHU Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Sebastian, Lewis. The Law of Trade Marks. London: Stevens and Sons, 1911.Google Scholar
Stanziani, Alessandro. The Rules of Exchange: French Capitalism in Comparative Perspective, Eighteenth to the Early Twentieth Centuries. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velkar, Aashish. Markets and Measurements in Nineteenth-Century Britain. Cambridge Studies in Economic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziliak, Stephen, and McCloskey, Deirdre. The Cult of Statistical Significance. Oxford: University of Michigan Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Austin, Marc, and Milner, Helen. “Strategies of European Standardization.” Journal of European Public Policy 8: Special Issue (2001): 411431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barzel, Yoram. “Measurement Cost and the Organization of Markets.” Journal of Law and Economics 25 (1982): 2748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Lisa. “Private Commercial Law in the Cotton Industry: Creating Cooperation through Rules, Norms, and Institutions.” Michigan Law Review 99 (2001): 17241790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevir, Mark, and Trentmann, Frank. “Markets in Historical Contexts: Ideas, Practices and Governance.” In Markets in Historical Contexts: Ideas and Politics in the Modern World, edited by Bevir, Mark and Trentmann, Frank, 124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggs, Norman. “A Tale Untangled: Measuring the Fineness of Yarn.” Textile History 35 (2004): 120129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, Stephen, and Marrison, Andrew. “External Economies of Scale in the Lancashire Cotton Industry, 1900–1950.” Economic History Review 55 (2002): 5177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunsson, Nils, and Jacobsson, Bengt. “The Contemporary Expansion of Standardisation.” In A World of Standards , edited by Brunsson, Nils and Jacobsson, Bengt, 120. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Carnevali, Francesca. “Social Capital and Trade Associations in America, c.1860–1914: A Microhistory Approach.” Economic History Review 64 (2011): 905928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, Stanley. “The Commercial Sector.” In The Lancashire Cotton Industry, edited by Rose, Mary, 6393. Preston, UK: Lancashire County Books, 1996.Google Scholar
David, Paul. “Clio and Economics of QWERTY.” American Economic Review 75 (1985): 332337.Google Scholar
Duguid, Paul. “Developing the Brand: The Case of Alcohol, 1800–1880.” Enterprise & Society 4, no. 3 (2003): 405441.Google Scholar
Duguid, Paul. “Networks and Knowledge: The Beginning and End of the Port Commodity Chain, 1703-1860.” Business History Review 79, no. 3 (2005): 453466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupree, Marguerite. “Foreign Competition and the Interwar Period.” In The Lancashire Cotton Industry, edited by Rose, Mary, 265295. Preston, UK: Lancashire County Books, 1996.Google Scholar
Ellenbogen, Gershon. “English Arbitration Practice.” Law and Contemporary Problems 17 (1952): 656678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellinger, Barnard, and Ellinger, Hugh. “Japanese Competition in the Cotton Trade.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 93 (1930): 185232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farnie, Douglas. “An Index of Commercial Activity: The Membership of the Manchester Royal Exchange, 1809–1948.” Business History 21 (1979): 97106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, Joseph, and Saloner, Garth. “Coordination through Committees and Markets.” RAND Journal of Economics 19 (1988): 235252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Robert. “The Adjudication of Commercial Disputes and the Legal System in Modern England.” British Journal of Law and Society 7 (1980): 141–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gereffi, Gary, Humphrey, John, and Sturgeon, Timothy. “The Governance of Global Value Chains.” Review of International Political Economy 12 (2005): 78104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbon, Peter. “Upgrading Primary Production: A Global Commodity Chain Approach.” World Development 29 (2001): 345–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark. “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness.” American Journal of Sociology 91 (1985): 481510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Fred. “The Millet of Manchester: Arab Merchants and Cotton Trade.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 19 (1992): 159176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, Elijah. “The Middleman in Commerce.” Transactions of the Manchester Statistical Society 1901 (1900): 5565.Google Scholar
Henson, Spencer, and Humphrey, John. “Understanding the Complexities of Private Standards in Global Agri-Food Chains as They Impact Developing Countries.” Journal of Development Studies 46 (2010): 16281646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, David, and Tweedale, Geoffrey. “The Trade Marks Question and the Lancashire Cotton Textile Industry, 1870–1914.” Textile History 27, no. 2 (1996): 207228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, David, and Toms, Steve. “Firm Structure and Financial Performance: The Lancashire Spinning Industry, c.1880–c.1960.” Accounting, Business and Financial History 7 (1997): 195232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huberman, Michael. “Piece Rates Reconsidered: The Case of Cotton.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 26 (1996): 393417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeremy, David. “Lancashire and the International Diffusion of Technology.” In The Lancashire Cotton Industry, edited by Rose, Mary, 210237. Preston, UK: Lancashire County Books, 1996.Google Scholar
Jewkes, John, and Jewkes, Sylvia. “A Hundred Years of Change in the Structure of the Cotton Industry.” Journal of Law and Economics 9 (1966): 115134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, Stephen. “Sub-Regional Specialization in the Lancashire Cotton Industry, 1884–1914: A Study in Organizational and Locational Change.” Journal of Historical Geography 8 (1982): 4163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kindelberger, Charles. “Standards As Public, Collective and Private Goods.” Kyklos 36 (1983): 377396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, Richard. “Economic Institutions and the Boundaries of the Firm: The Case of Business Groups.” In Oxford Handbook of Business Groups, edited by Colpan, Asli, Hikino, Takashi, and Lincoln, James, 629649. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Lazonick, William. “Industrial Organization and Technological Change: The Decline of the British Cotton Industry.” Business History Review 57 (1983): 195236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazonick, William. “The Cotton Industry.” In The Decline of the British Economy, edited by Elbaum, Bernard and Lazonick, William, 1850. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.Google Scholar
Leunig, Timothy. “A British Industrial Success: Productivity in the Lancashire and New England Cotton Spinning Industries a Century Ago.” Economic History Review 56 (2003): 90117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipartito, Kenneth. “The New York Cotton Exchange and the Development of the Cotton Futures Market.” Business History Review 57 (1983): 5072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrison, Andrew. “Indian Summer, 1870–1914.” In The Lancashire Cotton Industry, edited by Rose, Mary, 238264. Preston, UK: Lancashire County Books, 1996.Google Scholar
Mass, William, and Lazonick, William. “The British Cotton Industry and International Competitive Advantage: The State of the Debates.” In International Competition and Strategic Response in the Textile Industries since 1870 , edited by Rose, Mary, 965. London: Routledge, 1991.Google Scholar
McDowell, James. “Cotton Fibres from a Layman’s Point of View.” Transactions of the National Association of Cotton Manufacturers 114 (1923): 238271.Google Scholar
Ogilvie, Sheilagh. “‘Whatever Is, Is Right?’ Economic Institutions in Pre-Industrial Europe.” Economic History Review 60 (2007): 649684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olmstead, Alan L., and Rhode, Paul W.. “Hog-Round Marketing, Seed Quality, and Government Policy: Institutional Change in US Cotton Production, 1920–1960.” Journal of Economic History 63 (2003): 447488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, Robin. “Moral Hazard and the Assessment of Insurance Risk in Eighteenth- and Early-Nineteenth-Century Britain.” Business History Review 76 (2002): 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirrong, Craig. “The Efficient Scope of Private Transactions-Cost-Reducing Institutions: The Successes and Failures of Commodity Exchanges.” Journal of Legal Studies 24 (1995): 229255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponte, Stefano, and Gibbon, Peter. “Quality Standards, Conventions and the Governance of Global Value Chains.” Economy and Society 34 (2005): 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quark, Amy. “Transnational Governance as Contested Institution-Building: China, Merchants, and Contract Rules in the Cotton Trade.” Politics & Society 39 (2011): 339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rée, Alfred. “The Manchester Chamber of Commerce Testing House.” In Manchester Chamber of Commerce Handbook 1931–1932, 6367. Manchester, UK: Manchester Chamber of Commerce, 1932.Google Scholar
Rose, Mary B. “Role of the Family in Providing Capital and Managerial Talent in Samuel Greg and Company 1784–1840.” Business History 19 (1977): 3754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, A. W. Brian. “The Origins of Futures Trading in the Liverpool Cotton Market.” In Essays for Patrick Atiyah, edited by Cane, Peter and Stapleton, Jane, 179208. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Simpson, James. “Cooperation and Conflicts: Institutional Innovation in France’s Wine Markets, 1870–1911.” Business History Review 79 (2005): 527558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velkar, Aashish. “Transactions, Standardisation and Competition: Establishing Uniform Sizes in the British Wire Industry c.1880.” Business History 51, no. 2 (2009): 222247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ville, Simon. “Rent Seeking or Market Strengthening? Industry Associations in New Zealand Wool Broking.” Business History Review 81 (2007): 297321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, Martin B. H., and Sirbu, Marvin. “Technological Choice in Voluntary Standards Committees: An Empirical Analysis.” Economics of Innovation and New Technology 1 (1990): 111133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. “Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations.” Journal of Law and Economics 22 (1979): 233261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Report from the Select Committee on Trade Marks Bill and Merchandize Marks Bill , 12 P.P. 1862, 431.
Report from the Select Committee on Merchandise Marks Act (1862) Amendment Bill , 10 P.P. 1887, 357.
Report from the Select Committee on Merchandise Marks , 11 P.P. 1897, 29.
Board of Trade Working Party Reports: Cotton . London, HMSO: 1946.
Archives of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, Greater Manchester County Record Office, Manchester, UK.
Archive of the Oldham Master Cotton Spinners Association, John Rylands Library, Manchester, UK.
Records of United Turkey Red Co. Ltd., Glasgow University Archive Services, Glasgow.
Records of Bolton Master Cotton Spinners Association, Bolton Local Studies and Archives, Bolton, UK.
Archives of the Quarry Bank Mill (a National Trust property), Cheshire, UK.
Grocer
Huddersfield Chronicle and West Yorkshire Advertiser
Leeds Mercury
Manchester Guardian
The Manchester Chamber of Commerce Monthly Record
The Times
Times of India
3
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

“Spinning a Yarn”: Institutions, Law, and Standards c.1880–1914
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

“Spinning a Yarn”: Institutions, Law, and Standards c.1880–1914
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

“Spinning a Yarn”: Institutions, Law, and Standards c.1880–1914
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *